XPost: rec.arts.tv, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   From: relativity@paulba.no   
      
   Den 26.10.2025 08:08, skrev Thomas Heger:   
   >   
   > But Einstein could have been a tiny cog in a huge system, which was   
   > meant to derail science in general.   
   >   
   > I actually assume, that 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies' was   
   > meant as such a means, which intentionally tried to divert science from   
   > their supposed course.   
   >   
   > I think so, because that particular article contains an enormous amount   
   > of errors of all sorts.   
   >   
   > Some of them are actually comically stupid.   
      
      
   The metric below defines The Special Theory of Relativity (SR).   
   What can be deduced from this metric is what SR predicts.   
       (c⋅dτ)² = (c⋅dt)² − dx² − dy² − dz²   
      
   The theory Einstein defined in "On the electrodynamics of moving   
   bodies" is identical to the theory defined by the metric above.   
      
   No professional physicist will dispute that SR is a consistent theory.   
   (There have been physicists who have claimed that SR is inconsistent,   
     look up Herbert Dingle. But Dingle's arguments are long since proven   
     wrong.)   
      
   So we can consider it to be a fact that SR is a logically   
   consistent theory.   
      
   But the predictions of a logically consistent theory   
   do not have to be in accordance with measurements.   
   Only real experiments can show that.   
      
   Some of the experiments testing SR:   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Fizeau_by_Michelson.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Michelson_1887.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Kennedy_Thorndike.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Ives_Stilwell.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Ives_Stilwell_II.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Babcock_Bergman.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Frisch_Smith.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Beckmann_Mandics.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Filippas_Fox.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Brecher.pdf   
   https://paulba.no/paper/Brillet_Hall.pdf   
      
   Newtonian Mechanics (NM) and SR are both logically consistent   
   theories.   
   All the experiments above confirm SR, none falsify SR.   
   Most of the experiments above falsify NM.   
   (It takes but one experiment to falsify a theory.)   
      
   Now you can assume that all physicists are idiots, and   
   that all the experimental physicist who performed   
   the experiments are frauds who have faked their results.   
      
   That will make you look very smart.   
      
   >   
   > So we had to include Max Planck into the story, because it was him, who   
   > published that article.   
      
   Are you sure it wasn't Adolf Hitler who was the author of   
   "that article"?   
      
   >   
   > And Max Planck was everything else but stupid.   
   >   
   > So how could Planck print such a piece of garbage and why????   
   >   
   > It must be a HUGE scandal, which is still hidden and against which the   
   > general public has no means, because it would require time and   
   > knowledge, which common people do not have.   
      
   One can but be impressed by your ability to invent nonsense!   
      
   >   
   > So, we have also the question to solve, what made Einstein so famous in   
   > the 1920th and why nobody today dares to criticize that particular article.   
      
   Could it be because all knowledgeable persons know that SR is   
   a consistent theory which is thoroughly tested and never falsified?   
      
   --   
   Paul   
      
   https://paulba.no/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)